About your Search

20110701
20110731
Search Results 0 to 6 of about 7 (some duplicates have been removed)
afghanistan, the paper reports the possible halt of $800 million in assistance and equipment. that could have an effect on u.s. troops in afghanistan. the report says the aid could resume if pakistan takes tougher action against the taliban as well as al qaeda. meanwhile, secretary panetta told reporters on the plane it's time to focus on defeating al qaeda once and for all. >> i think we had undermined their ablthd to conduct 9/11-type attacks. we had them on the run. >> secretary panetta met with american military officials. atia abawi is in afghanistan. good morning. bring us up to date. >> good morning. panetta's very first trip as secretary of defense to afghanistan, before he landed he brought up the situation with al qaeda. he said, quote, the strategic defeat of al qaeda is within reach. this is a time to go after him, especially after bin laden. let's listen to what he had to say. >> now is the moment following what happened with bin laden, to put maximum pressure on them because i do believe that, if we continue this effort, that we can really cripple al qaeda. >> panetta said that,
the threat of default or downgrade. >> ron insana there. meanwhile, u.s. troops in afghanistan are worried they may not get paid because of this debt showdown in washington. gener good saturday morning to you, atia. so what was this meeting with the troops like? >> reporter: good morning, alex. the chairman of the joint chiefs of staff, admiral mullen, made his way down to the southern part of afghanistan, the most volatile part in the country. his number one question from the soldiers, airmen, sailors and marines wasn't necessarily about the military strategy but it was, will we get paid. and his response was, i actually don't know the answer to that question. i have confidence that at some point in time whatever compensation you are owed you will be given. obviously the americans here in afghanistan, very worried about what's going on in washington. many of these men and women haven't seen their families for several months. many won't see them for a full year and they're wondering if those family members are going to be getting those paychecks. they're risking their lives here in afghani
-- i know you've been hearing this morning about the troops in afghanistan who are worried about being paid. how close are we to default really, and what do you say to those people who are concerned? i know you have constituents that certainly will be affiliated with the military. what do you say to them, they think their families won't get the paychecks they need. >> well, we're not going to default. that's number one. and even if we did, social security and the military are going to get paid. so what i say is don't worry, this is going to be solved. this is a political problem of people wanting to have it their own way. now, you know, you simply can't govern this country this way. you have to have people of good will that will come together as the good book says, come, let us reason together. you can't stick in your ideological stance in your partisan stance, you've got to come together for the good of the country, and that will happen somewhere in the course of tonight and into tomorrow. >> and, sir, i know that you could probably very easily finger point to members on the extreme o
have to go to war in afghanistan and iraq. and that means we're going to have to spend billions of dollars that we hadn't accounted for. if we had a balanced budget amendment, we wouldn't have been able to do that without raising taxes significantly. there's no way we could have cut spending quickly enough to be able to finance going to war. so there are some contingencies that make a balanced budget something that we should think twice about. you know, there's another great saying, be careful what you wish for. and we don't want to get ourselves in that hole. but if we had a federal capital budget, which would allow us to do our long-term investing offline, not on the operating budget, it might be something to be considered. but not now and not for politics. and it doesn't have anything to do with the short-term problem of getting ourselves out of the deficit. if we had a balanced budget amendment that passed in the next two years, we'd have to make massive cuts and huge tax increases to balance the budget in year three. there's no other way we could do it. >> governor, a quick
Search Results 0 to 6 of about 7 (some duplicates have been removed)